Quote:
Quote by: Winter wind  Well maybe not. I care little about what it's called. Only what it is, and I have described it best I can.
because each experience is personal and individualized. |
Which is the worst kind of evidence for a claim that there is. Science uses evidence that is the same for everyone, not individuals. To maintain intellectual honesty, I rule out personal experience over facts that others can verify. Just yesterday morning I was out having a smoke, it was shortly before dawn and it was dark in all but the eastern sky. I was looking up at the stars, then I saw something move, as I looked, it looked like a bunch of objects with no lights on flying in a U formation... I thought to myself, I could see someone believing that MAYBE this was a UFO of some sort or even some kind of air craft(s) from the Air Force.... After watching this thing for about 45 seconds, I personally realized it must be a small flock of birds and because of the formation, probably in the Duck or Goose family. It was dark, so I can't be 100% sure. If I was less educated, I may have reported a UFO sighting, had I been predisposed to believe such things. I'm willing to bet, although I could be totally wrong, that you are predisposed to believe in god as a product of your upbringing and possible location in the world coupled with a fear of the possibility of an afterlife. I was born in Germany, raised in America by very weak Christian Family. I "found god" in my teens in and re-baptized myself into the southern baptist faith, switching from Lutheran. The two faiths aren't that much different, they both believe that all you have to do is confess your sins to god, accept Jesus as your saviour and you will be saved no matter what. I was indoctrinated into the baptist church because at the time, I was vulnerable, looking for fellowship and these people were pretty darn nice. It wasn't til later that I <cof> fell from grace and realized that there is no reason to assume there is any gods until there is logical proof and empirical evidence. After 9-11, I knew there was not god as described in the bible or the quran because that god contradicts its own attributes of being omni this and omni that. All Loving and All Powerfull are contradictory in the face of suffering. He could be one or the other, but not both as long as suffering (no matter how you define it) exists. (sorry for the rant)
Quote:
|
Actually Hindus believe in one God. Look up Brahman. But that is beside the point.
|
Ummmm I did, and this is what I found.....
Link to many Hindu Gods and Godesses.
And
The difference between the Christian God and Brahman
I've also seen it said that Brahman is the Creator God of everything and IS everything, thus the other gods of Hinduism are also "part of creation/Brahman". We are all part of Brahman as well... this is NOT the Christian understanding of God. But you're right, its besides the point ;-)
Quote:
|
This is what separates me from most Christians is that I think they are different names for the same thing. I mean, other then ascetic differences, these "gods" seem to have a similar message for humanity.
|
Uhhh why wouldn't you think that humanity as a whole would think this way? The "Golden Rule" of the bible isn't unique to the bible, it was a well know "rule" long before the Abrahmic gods, most likely because humanity as a whole, just happens to think alike.
Quote:
I'm just Christian because I think Jesus was more then human. Rather that He was divine. But I think that is the only major difference and that wasn't a huge part of my experience. God was.
Oh and I'm already nuts so...
|
How do you know Jesus even existed? There are many strong arguments that assert he never did
Jesusneverexisted.com Quote:
Says the atheist. You say potato...
I say the steadfast belief of God's promise of a better world.
This lacks not really in logic (not for me. It would lack in logic for someone else). However it does lack in empirical evidence, and I'm ok with that. That would make it boring. |
Actually that is the dictionary definition...
Faith 2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. I admit that definition 1 probably describes how you think, its really definition 2 that you are employing.
The bolded part, just because it appears boring, doesn't make it true and is intellectually bankrupt.